Congress leader Digvijay Singh has sought the dismissal of a defamation suit in a Thane magistrate court, filed by RSS swayamsevak Vivek Champanerkar over a tweet about former RSS chief Madhav Sadashivrao Golwalkar. Champanerkar’s suit, seeking a symbolic compensation of one rupee, followed Singh’s failure to issue an apology as demanded in a prior legal notice.
Thank you for reading this post, don't forget to subscribe!
MUMBAI: Congress leader Digvijay Singh has approached a magistrate court in Thane, seeking the dismissal of a defamation suit filed against him. The case pertains to an allegedly defamatory tweet Singh posted about former RSS chief Madhav Sadashivrao Golwalkar on July 8, 2023.
The legal action against Singh was initiated by Vivek Champanerkar, an RSS swayamsevak from Thane. Champanerkar had first issued a legal notice through his lawyers, Aditya Mishra and Surabhi Pandey, demanding an unconditional apology from Singh within a fortnight. However, Singh did not respond to the legal notice, prompting Champanerkar to file a defamation civil suit. The suit, lodged in the magistrate court, seeks a symbolic compensation of one rupee from Singh for the defamatory post made on social media.
Singh, who is said to have deleted the contentious post, has filed a fresh application challenging the basis of Champanerkar’s suit. In his application, Singh argued that Champanerkar’s suit is not intended to seek redress for personal harm but rather for the “so-called RSS and Golwalkar Guruji.”
The application states-
“Singh did not make any personal remarks against Champanerkar; therefore, Champanerkar has no grounds to file the suit against Singh for actions that were not directed at him.”
Singh’s legal team contends that the defamation suit lacks merit as Champanerkar has not demonstrated any personal injury or damage caused by the tweet. According to Singh, the suit should be dismissed on the grounds that it is not Champanerkar who was directly defamed, but rather the RSS and its former chief. This, Singh’s application suggests, invalidates Champanerkar’s standing to file the lawsuit.
the legitimacy of representation claims made by an individual associated with the Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh (RSS) has come under judicial scrutiny. This case involves two primary parties, Mr. Singh and Mr. Champanerkar, who have locked horns over the right to represent the RSS and, by extension, the legacy of the late Golwalkar Guruji, a revered figure within the organization.
The contention arises from an application filed by Singh, questioning the standing of Champanerkar in this lawsuit. Singh’s application meticulously points out the lack of clarity in Champanerkar’s relationship with RSS and Golwalkar Guruji.
ALSO READ: BREAKING | Supreme Court Quashes Defamation Complaint Against Tejashwi Yadav
Specifically, Singh argued-
“Champanerkar lacks locus standi as he has not indicated any legal authorization to claim relief on behalf of the RSS. Additionally, he has not explained his relationship to Golwalkar Guruji or if he has the right to seek relief on Guruji’s behalf in a representative capacity. These issues must be clarified to determine Champanerkar’s standing to file the suit.”
thereby emphasizing the need for legal clarity on these points.
On the other hand, Mishra, representing Champanerkar, mounted a vigorous defense arguing that the RSS and its members, known as swayamsevaks, are fundamentally inseparable, asserting a collective identity that transcends individual representation. Mishra’s reply highlighted the deep connections between the organization and its prominent members who hold significant governmental roles. He stated-
“The current President, Vice President, Prime Minister, and several union ministers are from this esteemed organization. Champanerkar must present all those witnesses (Swayamsevaks) to substantiate his claim before this court.”
reinforcing the notion that Champanerkar’s claim is not only about personal standing but also about embodying the collective spirit of the RSS.
ALSO READ: BREAKING | Rahul Gandhi Granted Bail in BJP Defamation Case
Further intensifying the debate, Mishra contended that denying Champanerkar the opportunity to present his case would be a gross injustice.
He articulated this concern by saying-
“It would be a great travesty of justice if Champanerkar is not allowed to prove his claim before the court. When a question of fact is involved, a full-fledged trial is necessary.”
This statement underlines the necessity for a thorough judicial examination to ensure that justice is served, considering the complexities involved in the matter.
The court is scheduled to hear detailed arguments from both parties on August 12.
